Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Simply explain to us how you view this as a fourth amendment case. Specifically: a person wishes to file an application for welfare benefits in Florida. He or she is informed that a drug test is required as a term of eligibility. The person may 1) decide that he or she does not really need welfare or 2) decide they do need welfare and so will take the drug test.
What probable cause does the government have to lay the requirement on ALL applicants? When do you think the fourth amendment comes into play? After all, the government can work around it rather easily, no? As it does with the Patriot Act. Do you support Patriot Act?
This is something I have been dreaming about for years. I never thought a politician would have the guts to do it. I cannot say enough good things about Gov. Rick Scott. I hope he runs for President someday and tries to enact this on a national scale.
I would love to see it go even further. For example force the welfare mom (or dad) who tests positive for drugs to payback every cent they received from welfare on a retroactive basis. I also favor the idea of taking the kids away until/unless the parent stays drug free for at least a year.
What probable cause does the government have to lay the requirement on ALL applicants? When do you think the fourth amendment comes into play? After all, the government can work around it rather easily, no? As it does with the Patriot Act. Do you support Patriot Act?
Ok, I shall ignore you. You do not have an answer to your statement that the fourth amendment applies.
I agree with the policy but don't really see the point. If you can be deemed eligible for SSI because of chronic drug and/or alcohol abuse what is the point in denying them Welfare? And if you recieve one or the other then you ususally qualify for Food Stamps...unless measures were put in place that stated that... yes, we will give you either welfare or SSI (and foodstamps) because you can't survive without drugs but in return you must give up custody and all rights therein of your children either to a relative (background checked with no visitation) or the state foster care system. (Uggh) But is that practical really?? (or even constitutional??)
It's the children I worry about...Remember the whole welfare system was originally designed to improve the lives of families and provide better nutrition for the children. I could give 2 flips about the drug addicts actually. I have yet to see a drug addict raise a healthy, sound, adaptable child.
Let me guess. SSI benefits are paid by the FEDS. Welfare benefits are funded by the STATES.
scott did campaign on bringing 700k jobs to florida...maybe this is part of his strategy to "create" a job by getting a drug user off of public assitance....
he also signed into law that those seeking an abortion must have an ultrasound and a three day waiting period on their own dime as well..
Scott also claimed the 5th 75 times during his deposition as to why his company, HCA, defrauded the government of $10B in false medicare claims..
scott currently has the lowest rating of any governor in america, hovering around 22%, lower even then guys like the cheeseheads scott walker or the buckeye john kasich....
if they test welfare they should be testing people on unemployment as well.
i dont care if they deserved benefits or not, too many people mooch off of unemployment while others work.
the problems that arise with this is what happens when the addict doesnt have the money to buy the drugs? the addict will resort to violence and find a way to support his habit.
its troubling that the people like myself and others who dont mind this could be on the receiving end from a glock because the government supported addict isnt getting his money anymore.
imo this will end up being a lose lose all around in the end.
welfare testing has always been an easy way to score political points.
the truth is welfare testing wont save florida.
i think many people believe it will, of course they are idiots though.
Employers pay for unemployment. I would support this if my company had to keep paying the UI for ex-employees because they are drug users and thus unemployable.
This is like the husband that has to pay alimony to his ex-wife until she gets remarried.
From what I got from family in Florida, there seems to be as much discussion about Rick Scott possibly enriching himself through this law then the actual testing.
It seems when he ran for office, he put a lot of his assets in a trust under his wife's name. And one of the primary businesses in that trust is drug testing. Bottom line is if this increases business for any company within a trust in his family, he is making money off his political office. May be a reason he is around what...24% approval rating?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
